Bannings

[IoleRae]

@Roz

Agree. “we saw/someone showed us this behavior and we stopped it” is the real value. That’s what makes people feel safe. Or me, anyway.

[Testament]

@Roz Nah, not devaluing the use of bans. By no means am I saying don’t bother banning someone because they’ll ‘just come back’. I think it’s a good show of support to the playerbase to say “This is messed up behavior and we’re not going to stand for it.” That’s a good thing, to me.

I’m just realistic enough to tell myself that some of them will come back, because again, I think a lot of the trouble cases feel as if they’re not doing anything wrong. Along with that sense of not getting the last word in.

[Herja]

@Roz All of this. I have no expectation that a ban will prevent someone determined from jumping back on the game but what those bans do is establish the culture of the game and let people who aren’t manipulative jerks know where the boundaries are and, I think more importantly, know that they can report those related behaviors and that they will be taken seriously even if they don’t result in a ban right away.

[Pavel]

Locks aren’t there to keep bad people out, they’re there to stop good people making bad choices.

[GF]

@Herja said in Bannings:

@GF No one was investigating her before her same bad behaviors started to come up and she was being pushy toward people who had already been burned by her.

I’m not saying it’s rational. I’m just saying when most people lie, they feel a guilt or at least a self-consciousness about it that causes them to overcorrect. How many times have you noticed someone was lying to you because they started going into way more detail about the story than they would if they were telling the truth?

[Snackness]

@Testament I get where you’re coming from. It’s really easy to get around an IP ban if you really want to, and unfortunately for some weirdass reason people who get banned for assholery REALLY WANT TO.

[Testament]

@Snackness said in Bannings:

@Testament I get where you’re coming from. It’s really easy to get around an IP ban if you really want to, and unfortunately for some weirdass reason people who get banned for assholery REALLY WANT TO.

That’s basically all I was saying, yeah. Not that bans weren’t useful or that they didn’t set a standard or expectation for how a gamer runner expects the players there should treat each other.

[hellfrog]

@Testament said in Bannings:

Thinking about it, and how I view it, if someone was banned for really shitty behavior and then they eventually sneak back on unnoticed by any and all who they might’ve wronged. It tells me one of two things.

Yeah bans are frustratingly not very effective from a tech/staffing standpoint.

But on this other hand, when I was staffing (which i am not, and am not making any decisions on any game ps ty), I kind of felt like, if someone did get iced out or even banned for behavior, but they managed to come back and like, get away with it by NOT REPEATING THE SAME BEHAVIOR?

Great! Best possible outcome! I don’t think bans from RP games are ever about punishment, they are about (as people mentioned) showing your players what you won’t tolerate and what they should feel safe calling out, and stopping a harmful behavior.

The goal is always for the behavior to stop.

[Narson]

@sao said in Bannings:

I think one of the things that is most frustrating about the new MSB (I swear I’ll get off this horse anytime now) is that the whole point of the Hog Pit was to be able to call out abusive pieces of shit, so having her running around the kinder friendly message board pretending to be a new person who oozes rainbows and compassion from her pores is like shit icing on an ugly damn cake.

Yes, the celebrating of no longer being held accountable for actions is an odd one. But I’m glad the previous things are still accessible. I do like the idea of a perfect society and all that, but I am reminded of Demolition Man. And it seems weird to start off with Simon Phoenix already in the society, let alone more than one of them.

Oh, that works with the terrorists bit. We are the scraps. To Taco Bell!

[Testament]

@Narson Of all the analogies I wasn’t ready for, one for Demolition Man I’d suspect is on that list. That said, it’s also the one I didn’t know I needed.

[BloodAngel]

@Narson

[Snackness]

@Narson I don’t get the Taco Bell refence but ok

[BloodAngel]

@Snackness

[Tez]

Honestly, I’m okay with this? Taco Bell has a lot of nice veggie options and if you are the kind of person who can pass up a quesarito I DON’T EVEN WANT TO KNOW YOU.

[Narson]

@Snackness Taco Bell won the franchise wars, becoming the only/last chain restaurant in the film. In the UK/Europe it was changed to Pizza Hut (because we didn’t have Taco Bell). We first encounter the “terrorist” scraps in the film when they raid a Taco Bell.

[GF]

@Tez said in Bannings:

Honestly, I’m okay with this? Taco Bell has a lot of nice veggie options and if you are the kind of person who can pass up a quesarito I DON’T EVEN WANT TO KNOW YOU.

Never trust a restaurant that serves you raw onions in your bean burrito.

[Snackness]

@Narson Apparently I missed out on a cultural touchstone.

[Pavel]

Taco Bell is fine but the lack of variety would make me commit crimes. Stealth crimes. Stealth food crimes.

[Tez]

@GF I LOVE THEIR BEAN BURRITOS. Raw onions and red sauce and cheese and beans yes please.

[Narson]

@Pavel They have an OK range. And you can make it better with your own combos. Like the seasoned fries dipped in dulce de leche, or dipping the cinnamon crunch things in the nacho cheese.